The Classic Liberal Blog

It was interesting to hear the "Ron Paul Question" asked at the Americans for Tax Reform-sponsored debate for chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC). Even more so, were the candidates answers to the question.

Video and analysis below the fold.

The Question: In light of the success of Ron Paul and the Campaign for Liberty in attracting large numbers of activists to the Ron Paul campaign and to conservative causes, what have you done to reach out to Ron Paul voters, and what will you do as chairman to make sure that the Ron Paul voters remain or become Republican voters?

"Ron Paul certainly brought a whole new generation of voters and I think it's important going forward that we recognize the strengths and the attributes of these individuals who are out there actively building the party and building a movement, a consensus if you will, on certain issues. We can't look that in the eye and say ‘No, we don't want that,'" - Michael Steele

"I witnessed early on the Ron Paul army in South Carolina ... I want people involved in my party that will hang off bridges and paint on their cars and make up t-shirts. There was a passion that I saw of those people for him and his ideas." - South Carolina Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson

"I think you treat [Paul supporters] like everybody else-if they want to be part of the Republican Party, if they want to participate, we have to welcome them in." - Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis

"Dr. Paul...he is a wonderful man with wonderful ideas ..." - Chip Saltsman

"I personally have treated leaders of his campaign with respect, I've met with them. I personally treated his foot soldiers with respect whether it was at our convention in Kentucky or whether it was the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, St. Paul ..." - (incumbent) RNC Chairman Mike Duncan

"We are a federation that invites differences ... The RNC can no longer be a social club, it must be the flagship Republican organization in this nation." - Ken Blackwell

 

An Observation:

The first thing that stuck me was that each candidate's answer included a disclaimer, summarized best by Chip Saltsman:

Do we agree with him all the time? Absolutely not.

What is the point of adding such disclaimer?  No two people on the planet agree with each other "all the time," so I'd like to know specifically what the areas of disagreement are.

Unfortunately, something tells me it has a lot to do with the size and scope of government.

The blog Conservatives with Attitude as a terrific, yet short post regarding the "Ron Paul Question," noting:

What a difference a few months make, or was it realizing that no one tried to engage the Paul supporters over to McCain after the primary, who instead voted third party, or stayed home totally.

Let's not forget that Ron Paul wasn't even invited to speak at the GOP National Convention, obviously Paul's economic expertise and prediction of the mess we are in now wasn't needed by the McCain campaign.

A comment on this post, I believe, tells us a lot about the tenuous relationship between Ron Paul supporters and the RNC.  This one quote, sums up what I find to be the number one reason Ron Paul gets so blatantly shunned by his own party ...

They don't like the people who support him!

Obama was going to win whether the Paultards voted for McCain or not. They were not, and are not important. They are merely an embarassment.

This same commenter also says Paul's supporters are both "unruly" and "boorish."

Interesting ... isn't it? Limited government is now "boorish."

Like the guy or not, Ron Paul is certainly a man you can trust in Congress.  There's certainly no other member of that institution who defends our Constitution, and its limits on government, the way Ron Paul does.

But since his supporters have the energy and conviction to be loud with their opinions and desire to shrink government, the party should simply shun them?

So much for limited government.  Apparently, even the Republican constituents prefer the high-taxation and economic destruction of Big Government.

Patrick Ruffini on The Next Right, had this to say on the day prior to the debate.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Ron Paul activists have voted up the majority of questions con the site. Most of these questions deal not with the vital and necessary goal of getting more Republicans who supported Ron Paul involved in the process, but on policy questions like eliminating the Federal Reserve, Austrian economics, the Fair Tax and the 2nd Amendment that the RNC Chairman has absolutely no jurisdiction over.

Whether it's Ron Paul Republicans or movement conservatives or moderates, my message to all is one and the same: the RNC is not a policymaking body -- nor should it be. It cannot make Republicans in Congress spend less, worthy a goal as that might be. The RNC's job is to win elections -- period.

There's those "stinkin' activists" again!  They're (unruly) participating, and actively pushing their agenda forward.  Heaven forbid! Can't have that!

What is it about activism that scares these Establishment Republicans so much?  Are they worried they'll be forced to take a stand and pick sides? That they won't be able to continue on by clinging to the Democrat-pandering they've insisted on for so many years?

And of course ... Oh, no!  Policy questions!

Another way to state Ruffini's opinion would be:

Winning matters, not principle.  Care not what the chairmanship's political philosophy might, we can't control the politicians anyway. So there's no need to know what the potential-party leadership's political points of view are in the first place.

In politics, policy IS principle! And the Republican Party is setting themselves up for more losses in 2010, which will bleed into their prospects for the 2012 cycle.  They simply refuse to take a stand and fight for the American Creed!

And no ... this post isn't about Ron Paul.  It's about realizing our country lacks politicians who will not only honor the Constitution, but fight to re-establish the limited government our Founder's gave us!

The Republican Party sure isn't interested in the task.  It's obvious the party of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan is dead.

Imagine ... just for a moment ... that a large portion of Congress actually acted in the following way?

Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.

If Republicans don't want that, then they should be honest about it, fold-up shop, and join the Democratic Party.

 

From the debate:

Get the Flash Player to see the wordTube Media Player.